Background to this inspection
Updated
20 February 2018
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
This inspection took place on 5 and 8 December 2017 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the service is a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that the provider would be in. The inspection was carried out by one inspector and an expert by experience. The expert by experience made phone calls to people and their relatives. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.
Before the inspection, we looked at all the information we held about the service. This information included the statutory notifications that the service sent to the Care Quality Commission. A notification is information about important events that the service is required to send us by law. We asked the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. Due to technical problems a PIR was not available and we took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report. We also contacted health and social care professionals and the local authority safeguarding team for feedback about the service. We used this information to help inform our inspection planning.
During the inspection, we spoke with two people, one relative, two members of staff, the deputy manager and the general manager. We looked at four people’s care records and five staff records. We also looked at records related to the management of the service such as the administration of medicines, complaints, accidents and incidents, safeguarding, health and safety, and policies and procedures.
Updated
20 February 2018
This announced inspection took place on 5 and 8 December 2017. This was the provider’s first inspection since their registration at a new location in April 2017. Studio 43.3 is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their houses. It provides a service to older adults. At the time of the inspection 12 people were using the service.
The service had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People told us they felt safe with the staff. The service had clear procedures to recognise and respond to abuse. All staff completed safeguarding training. Senior staff completed risk assessments for people who used the service which provided sufficient guidance for staff to minimise identified risks. The service had a system to manage accidents and incidents to reduce reoccurrence.
The service had enough staff to support people and carried out satisfactory background checks of staff before they started working. The service had an on call system to make sure staff had support outside the office working hours. Staff supported people so they took their medicine safely. People were protected from the risk of infection.
Senior staff carried out an initial assessment of needs and risks of each person prior to the start of the service. The service provided an induction and training, and supported staff through regular supervision and observation visits to help them undertake their role.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice. People consented to their care before they were delivered. The provider and staff understood their responsibilities within the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
Staff supported people with food preparation. People’s relatives coordinated health care appointments to meet people’s needs, and staff were available to support people to access health care appointments if needed. Staff worked with other services to ensure an effective joint-working.
People told us they were consulted about their care and support needs. People were supported to be as independent in their care as possible. Staff supported people in a way which was caring, respectful, and protected their privacy and dignity. Staff developed people’s care plans that were tailored to meet their individual needs. Care plans were reviewed regularly and were up to date. Staff completed daily care records to show what support and care they provided to each person.
The service had a clear policy and procedure for managing complaints. People knew how to complain and would do so if necessary.
The service sought the views of people who used the services. As a result of the inspection feedback, the provider notified the CQC about a safeguarding concern. Staff felt supported by the provider. The service had an effective system to assess and monitor the quality of the care people received and they worked in partnership with health and social care professionals.